Same version on binary packages and updated ports
jerrymc at msu.edu
Thu Dec 29 17:40:16 UTC 2011
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 05:16:11PM +0100, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
I am not expert on all this, but can give a couple of impressions.
> I am giving my firsts steps with FreeBSD.
Welcome to FreeBSD. It is a good system.
> I've searched a lot in google, mailing list, forums, freebsd
> handbook and I am still not clear about the following.
> In a RELEASE fresh install, after updating the ports using i.e.
> portsnap, the packages downloaded with pkp_add -r are older
> versions respect their port counterparts, leading to
> dependencies issues. So, once the ports tree is updated:
> 1) Am I forced to compile all?
Anything that has changed and anything that depends on those things.
That can mean a lot of recompiling.
> 2) Should I use STABLE to get the same versions with pkg_add
> than compiling up to date ports? Are STABLE packages compiled
> from this ports?
Check this page:
It's more accurate than what I started to wrie.
The ports tree and the OS release generally sync up when a RELEASE
comes out, but that soon begins to diverge as ports are changed.
Ports are worked on independently by port maintainers.
> 3) In case my assumption above is correct; taking in care that
> in a production system it is advisable (handbook) to stay with
> RELEASE, should I avoid updating the ports tree in i.e. a server
> machine? What to do with broken ports in this case?
> Resuming, is there a default way to install-update the software
> keeping ports and binary packages in one piece? What is
> advisable in general terms for a desktop and what for a server?
> It will be enough for me if someone just point me to documentation.
> Big thanks
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-questions